BY COUNCILOR STENBERG:01-0379R
RESOLUTION GRANTING JIM GRUBA AND SHIRLEY REIERSON A VARIANCE FROM THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 51-29 OF THE DULUTH CITY CODE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2525 MINNESOTA AVENUE.
WHEREAS, on May 7, 2001, the appeal of Jim Gruba and Shirley Reierson to exceed the 30 percent impervious surface requirement of Section 51-29 of the Duluth City Code came before the city council in the city council chambers in Duluth, Minnesota, with Jim Mohn, Duluth planning staff; Jeff Jackson, planning commission; Jim Gruba, appellant; Noel Knutson, appellant's architect; and Shirley Reierson, appellant; all submitting testimony on the matter;
NOW, THEREFORE, the Duluth City Council makes the following findings of
fact in this matter:
(a) The city council adopts the testimony of Jim Gruba that the easement between the house he is buying and the duplex was in existence when the person he is purchasing the property from purchased the property so that the problem caused by the existing driveway was not created either by Mr. Gruba or the seller of the property;
(b) On street parking on Park Point and the lack of off street parking on Park Point are significant neighborhood problems;
(c) The house that the appellant is buying is set back from the street more than other surrounding dwellings so that the addition of the garage will not adversely affect the aesthetics of the neighborhood;
(d) Through the use of Geo Block, appellants are mitigating adverse runoff effects from the driveway to the garage;
(e) The increase in impervious surface from 43 percent to 50 percent in light of the Geo Block mitigation is not significant;
(f) The project as presented by the appellant constitutes a reasonable use of the property;
(g) Because of parking problems in the Park Point neighborhood, the narrow width of appellant's lot, and the existing driveway easement running through appellant's lot, not having a garage or off street parking constitutes a legitimate hardship in this case.
THEREFORE, the appellants have shown by substantial evidence that they have a hardship relating to the property at 2525 Minnesota Avenue in that they have no garage or off street parking and that this hardship was neither created by them or the seller of their property.
RESOLVED, that the appellants have met the standard set forth in Section
51-30 for a variance and their variance shall be approved and the decision
of the planning commission in this matter shall be reversed.